On the recordMarch 16, 2006
I would simply say that what the gentleman is suggesting by insisting on his point of order is that the rules of this House may be bent by the majority in order to provide special interest language in a piece of legislation, but they cannot be used by the minority to defend the public interest in that same case. I would find that a strange interpretation of the rules indeed. The Acting CHAIRMAN. Does any other Member wish to be heard on the point of order? Hearing none, the Chair is prepared to rule. The Chair finds this amendment repeals existing law. The amendment therefore constitutes legislation in violation of clause 2 of rule XXI. The point of order is sustained and the amendment is not in order.
Source
govinfo.gov
